A PCP characterization of NP with optimal amortized query complexity

For every ε > 0 and integers k and q (with k ≤ q ≤ k + k/4), we present a PCP characterization of NP where the verifier queries q bits (of which only k are free bits), accepts a correct proof with probability ≥ 1 − ε and accepts a “proof” of a wrong statement with probability ≤ 2. In particular, for every δ > 0 we have a PCP characterization of NP where the verifier has, simultaneously, 1 + δ amortized query complexity and δ amortized free bit complexity. Both results are tight, unless P = NP . The optimal amortized query complexity of our verifier implies essentially tight nonapproximability results for constraint satisfaction problems. Specifically, we can show that k-CSP, the problem of finding an assignment satisfying the maximum number of given constraints (where each constraint involves at most k variables) is NP-hard to approximate to within a factor 2 √ . The problem can be approximated to within a factor 2, and was known to be NP-hard to approximate to within a factor about 2. We can also prove some new separation results between different PCP model. A PCP characterization of NP with optimal amortized free bit complexity implies that for every δ > 0 it is hard to approximate the maximum clique problem to within a n factor. Such a characterization had already been proved by H̊astad [H̊as96], in a celebrated recent breakthrough. Our construction gives an alternative, simpler, proof of this result. Our techniques also give a tight analysis of linearity testing algorithms with low amortized query complexity. As in the case of PCP, we show that it is possible to have a linearity testing algorithm that makes q queries and has error bounded from above by 2 √ . We also prove a lower bound showing that, for a certain, fairly general, class of testing algorithms, our analysis is tight even in the lower order term. That is, we show that the error of a q-query testing algorithm in this class has to be at least 2 √ . ∗ asamor@ias.edu. Institute for Advanced Study and DIMACS † luca@cs.columbia.edu. Columbia University. Work partly done at DIMACS.

[1]  Uri Zwick,et al.  Finding almost-satisfying assignments , 1998, STOC '98.

[2]  Carsten Lund,et al.  Proof verification and hardness of approximation problems , 1992, Proceedings., 33rd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[3]  Maria J. Serna,et al.  The (Parallel) Approximability of Non-Boolean Satisfiability Problems and Restricted Integer Programming , 1998, STACS.

[4]  Ran Raz,et al.  A sub-constant error-probability low-degree test, and a sub-constant error-probability PCP characterization of NP , 1997, STOC '97.

[5]  Madhu Sudan,et al.  Improved Low-Degree Testing and its Applications , 1997, STOC '97.

[6]  Nadia Creignou,et al.  A Dichotomy Theorem for Maximum Generalized Satisfiability Problems , 1995, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[7]  Uri Zwick,et al.  Approximation algorithms for constraint satisfaction problems involving at most three variables per constraint , 1998, SODA '98.

[8]  Luca Trevisan Approximating Satisfiable Satisfiability Problems (Extended Abstract) , 1997, ESA.

[9]  Luca Trevisan,et al.  Probabilistically checkable proofs with low amortized query complexity , 1998, Proceedings 39th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (Cat. No.98CB36280).

[10]  J. Håstad Clique is hard to approximate withinn1−ε , 1999 .

[11]  Mihir Bellare,et al.  Free bits, PCPs and non-approximability-towards tight results , 1995, Proceedings of IEEE 36th Annual Foundations of Computer Science.

[12]  Sanjeev Arora,et al.  Probabilistic checking of proofs: a new characterization of NP , 1998, JACM.

[13]  Uriel Feige,et al.  Two-Prover Protocols - Low Error at Affordable Rates , 2000, SIAM J. Comput..

[14]  Johan Håstad,et al.  Some optimal inapproximability results , 2001, JACM.

[15]  Mihir Bellare,et al.  Free Bits, PCPs, and Nonapproximability-Towards Tight Results , 1998, SIAM J. Comput..

[16]  Luca Trevisan Approximating Satisfiable Satisfiability Problems , 2000, Algorithmica.

[17]  Johan Håstad,et al.  Some optimal inapproximability results , 1997, STOC '97.

[18]  M. Bellare Proof Checking and Approximation: Towards Tight Results , 1996 .

[19]  Ran Raz,et al.  PCP characterizations of NP: towards a polynomially-small error-probability , 1999, STOC '99.

[20]  László Lovász,et al.  Approximating clique is almost NP-complete , 1991, [1991] Proceedings 32nd Annual Symposium of Foundations of Computer Science.

[21]  Johan Håstad,et al.  Clique is hard to approximate within n/sup 1-/spl epsiv// , 1996, Proceedings of 37th Conference on Foundations of Computer Science.

[22]  Carsten Lund,et al.  Efficient probabilistically checkable proofs and applications to approximations , 1993, STOC.

[23]  Carsten Lund,et al.  Proof verification and the hardness of approximation problems , 1998, JACM.

[24]  M. Bellare,et al.  Efficient probabilistic checkable proofs and applications to approximation , 1994, STOC '94.

[25]  Luca Trevisan,et al.  Recycling queries in PCPs and in linearity tests (extended abstract) , 1998, STOC '98.

[26]  Luca Trevisan,et al.  Gadgets, Approximation, and Linear Programming , 2000, SIAM J. Comput..

[27]  Manuel Blum,et al.  Self-testing/correcting with applications to numerical problems , 1990, STOC '90.

[28]  David P. Williamson,et al.  A complete classification of the approximability of maximization problems derived from Boolean constraint satisfaction , 1997, STOC '97.

[29]  Luca Trevisan,et al.  Positive Linear Programming, Parallel Approximation and PCP's , 1996, ESA.

[30]  Rajeev Motwani,et al.  On syntactic versus computational views of approximability , 1994, Proceedings 35th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[31]  Mihir Bellare,et al.  Improved non-approximability results , 1994, STOC '94.